Abstract. Late in 1991, an enveloped RNA virus (now called porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome [PRRS] virus) was identified as the etiologic agent for mystery swine disease. In 1992, laboratory procedures for the diagnosis of this disease evolved rapidly, and veterinary diagnosticians started applying these tests to field cases. This report is written from the perspective of veterinary laboratory diagnosticians and utilizes 3 case studies to define the advantages and disadvantages of the various available diagnostic laboratory PRRS test procedures in different clinical situations. The diagnostic procedures currently used in our laboratory for investigating PRRS are pathologic examination, serologic testing, fluorescent antibody (FA) testing, and virus isolation. Interstitial pneumonia, characterized by mononuclear cell infiltration of alveolar walls with normal airway epithelium, is a hallmark lesion for the disease, especially in neonatal pigs with respiratory distress. Interstitial pneumonia is not a specific lesion and must be coupled with other tests to verify PRRS virus infection. Demonstration of seroconversion is helpful, especially in sows that have experienced reproductive failure. The indirect FA test detects antibody sooner than the serum neutralization test and will likely become the serologic test of choice. The direct FA test on fresh tissue utilizes monoclonal antibody and is useful for investigating PRRS virus-associated pneumonia. Virus isolation utilizing swine alveolar macrophages has also been a useful diagnostic procedure. All of the above tests have been universally unrewarding when applied to aborted, mummified, or stillborn piglets.
Veterinary colleges face difficulties in meeting the demand for rural veterinarians with the scope to practice quality production medicine. Increasing population density around veterinary colleges, retaining the interest of students with a background in animal agriculture, and educating students without a farm background requires that veterinary colleges consider innovative ways to not only teach traditional food-animal practice but give future veterinarians the advanced skills the food industry demands. This article describes a three-year elective program, Beef Records Analysis, in which beef production medicine is taught by teaming a student and a beef producer together early in the student's veterinary education. These producer/student teams complete risk assessments, balance rations, collect financial and production information, and evaluate back-grounding and feedlot enterprises. Students learn how to evaluate their producers using industry benchmarks and past performance records and how to communicate their findings back to their producer. Producers often make management decisions based on the students’ findings, and, because the students maintain their relationships with producers for three years, they can assess the outcomes of the producers who follow or ignore their recommendations and interventions. Students share recommendations and outcomes associated with their herd with the entire class. This allows students to learn how to establish best management practices through objective analysis of outcomes of recommended practices of all herds represented in the class. While a formal assessment of the course is needed, the students rate the program very high on evaluations.
It is time for the faculty of veterinary colleges to take responsibility for the veterinary curriculum, to move beyond the debate over teaching styles, and to understanding what a curriculum needs to accomplish. Our challenge is to engage students, faculty, and all veterinary professionals in evidence-based medicine and medical outcomes assessment and to identify best practices and continually improve the quality of veterinary health care. The education program of students must lay the foundation for this essential approach to veterinary practice.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.